On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 05:58:40PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> 1. Rank the following possible functions of Debian Project Leader in
[snip - ranking system]
>
> [ 2 ] attending trade shows and conferences
> [ 1 ] resolving disputes internal to the Project
> [ 2 ] representing Debian to trade associations, businesses and NGOs
> (non-governmental organizations)
> [ 2 ] drafting and implementing internal procedures for the Project
> that aren't already well-defined
> [ 1 ] appointing delegates per the Constitution
> [ ] fixing bugs in packages that no one else will fix
> [ 3 ] cash fundraising
> [ 3 ] acquiring donations of bandwidth, equipment, and hosting
> [ 4 ] mentoring other developers
>
> Comments:
Letting the CTTE/others resolve disputes where applicable, procedure
definitions shouldn't be made by the DPL alone, but perhaps by a
delegated committee (or such)
>
> 2. Rank the following past and present DPLs in order of greatest
> Comments (why did you rank these people as you did?):
No experience with any DPLs except bdale...
> 3. True or false: the New Maintainer system is still broken.
True
> 4. True or false: we should place more emphasis on architectures that
> have a lot of users.
False
> Comments:
Architectures with a lot of users (i386) already get a lot of attention.
> 5. True or false: release management in this Project is a big problem.
True
> 6. True or false: there are too many inactive developers.
True
> 7. True, false, or not applicable: the Debian Project Leader should see
> to it that inactive developers are placed on notice that they will
> be dropped from the Project, and then if they do not become active,
> "expire" them from our ranks.
True
> 8. True or false: the concept of "one maintainer per package" is
> outmoded, and packages should be maintained as more of a group or
> communal process.
True
> Comments:
.. partly, not all packages need this.
> 9. True or false: the Debian Policy Manual and Bug Tracking System
> should be used together as a "stick" with which to compel
> uncooperative maintainers to change the way they maintain their
> packages.
False ...
> Comments:
... but Debian needs to remain a whole, and maintain a 'uniformity'(sp)
> 10. True or false: the Debian Project is biased against people who do
> not speak English fluently.
True
> Comments:
Not much compared to others, normal in the computer world.
> 11. True, false, or not applicable: there is not a lot that we can do
> about the Debian Project being biased against people who do not
> speak English fluently.
True
> 12. Should the DPL attempt to build consensus among a small group of
> experts or among the whole project before taking a major action, or
> should he go it alone? Mark one.
>
> [ ] build consensus among a small group
> [ X ] build consensus among the whole Project
> [ ] take unilateral action
Or, where applicable, the people affected.
> 13. Rank the following possible traits of Debian Project Leader as
> assets (with an "A") or liabilities (with an "L") between the
> brackets to the left of the item. Leave blank items you consider as
> having no bearing on the role of DPL.
>
> [ A ] a high level of visibility as a "regular developer" on
> internal Project mailing lists
> [ A ] a high level of visibility as Project leader on internal
> Project mailing lists
> [ ] a high level of visibility in Debian-related IRC channels
> [ ] a preference for reading prepared statements over extemporaneous
> presentations at public gatherings
> [ L ] a preference for brokering agreement behind the scenes between
> conflicting parties
> [ A ] a preference for brokering agreement in public between
> conflicting parties
> [ A ] a sense of humor
> 14. True or false: the Debian Project Leader should attend as many trade
> shows and conferences as possible for him or her.
False...
> Comments:
... unless he wants to. He should feel free to, of course.
> 15. True, false, or not applicable: Debian Project funds should be
> spent on getting the Debian Project Leader to as many trade shows
> and conferences as possible when corporate sponsorship is
> unavailable.
False
> 16. True or false: the Technical Committee is operating as intended
> under the Constitution.
False
> 17. True or false: a simple majority of voting Debian Developers should
> be sufficient to modify the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
False
> Comments:
Being the basis for the Debian project, I'd expect at least a qualified
majority (I do not recall the size, but 3/4ths seems reasonable to me)
> 18. True or false: a simple majority of voting Debian Developers should
> be sufficient to modify the Debian Social Contract.
False
> Comments:
See above.
> 19. Should decisions about DFSG-compliance be made on the debian-legal
> list, or should we have a more formalized body for making such
> decisions?
debian-legal
> Comments:
People with skill and interest can subscribe.
> 20. True or false: under the current Constitution as written, a simple
> majority of voting Debian Developers is sufficient to modify the
> Debian Social Contract and Free Software Guidelines.
No idea. False, I'd guess.
> 21. Mark the statements below that accurately (if not precisely) reflect
> your opinions with an "X" between the brackets. Note that these
> statements are wide-ranging in nature. If you have insufficient
> context upon which to ground an affirmative answer, leave it blank.
> Where I consider it important to determine what the respondents to
> this questionnaire *don't* believe or agree with, I have supplied a
> contrapositive statement. Feel free to elaborate on your answers in
> the comments section.
>
> [ ] The DPL should not waste his time on arguments about the
> Constitution, Social Contract, or DFSG.
> [ ] The DPL is always perceived as the DPL, even when he or she is
> not sending mails from "leader@debian.org" or providing
> evidence of his or her leader status elsewhere in mail
> messages he or she sends.
> [ X ] The person elected to the office of DPL has a special
> responsibility to keep his or her mouth shut on potentially
> inflammatory issues, except when acting explicitly as DPL.
> [ ] The Debian Project will only get as good a DPL as it deserves.
> [ X ] Everything in Debian main should be treated as software under
> the DFSG, even if it isn't software by some definitions.
> [ X ] We let too much stuff that violates the spirit of the DFSG
> into main.
> [ ] The debian-legal list is infested with a bunch of nitpicky
> nitwits who give the Project a bad name and keep Debian from
> being as good as it could be by rejecting software from main
> for no good reason.
> [ X ] A good Debian Developer doesn't necessarily make for a good
> Project Leader.
> [ ] Debian should toss the DFSG and adopt the Open Source
> Definition (OSD) instead.
> [ ] Debian should delegate license interpretation to the Open
> Source Initiative (OSI) [maintainers of the OSD].
> [ X ] Debian should stop distributing the non-free section.
> [ ] Debian should keep the non-free section even if it dwindles to
> the point where there is nothing interesting in it, in the
> event that important new non-free software appears that our
> users might want.
> [ X ] Our twin priorities of "our users" and "Free Software" are
> sometimes in conflict with each other.
> [ ] The primary purpose of the Debian Project should be to supply
> a high-quality operating system to as many people as possible.
> [ X ] The primary purpose of the Debian Project should be to supply
> a high-quality, Free operating system to whoever is interested
> in it.
> [ ] The Debian Project is an insufficiently welcoming environment
> to female geeks and computer professionals.
> [ X ] The DPL should step in to mediate disagreements between Debian
> Developers and upstream developers, as recently happened with
> MPlayer.
> [ X ] The Debian Project should work with SPI or some other
> organization to try and see that its needs and goals are
> respected, or at least not meddled with, by governments.
> [ X ] Debian Developers are substantially better at critical
> thinking and logical reasoning than the general populace.
> [ X ] The migration of murphy from qmail to postfix was a good
> thing.
> [ X ] The migration of murphy from qmail to postfix was important.
> [ ] Being elected Debian Project Leader is primarily a reward for
> good work.
> [ X ] The Debian Machine Usage Policy (DMUP) needs to be revised.
> [ ] Revising the DMUP is important.
> [ X ] Voters in the Debian Project have a responsibility to make
> themselves well-informed about the issues before casting a
> ballot.
> [ X ] There should be no one in the Project with
> extra-constitutional power; that is, Debian keyring
> maintenance, archive administration, system administration,
> and so forth should all be formally delegated positions by the
> DPL.
> [ X ] Making the Debian keyring maintainer, archive administrators,
> and system administrators DPL delegates has creates a
> potentially dangerous situation for which there is no analogue
> under the current situation.
> [ ] The DPL has more important things to worry about than who's
> delegated to do what.
> [ ] People who capitalize the phrase "Free Software" are annoying.
> [ ] The Free Software Foundation is run by a bunch of crazy hippie
> communists, and Debian is being taken over by more of the same.
> [ ] The Open Source Initiative is run by a bunch of Christian
> fundamentalist right-wing gun nuts, and Debian is being taken
> over by more of the same.
> [ ] I deeply resent whimsy intruding into this questionnaire.
> [ ] A person who lost the DPL election twice shouldn't think about
> running again.
> [ ] No one who lost the DPL election was ever subsequently elected
> DPL.
> [ ] No one who lost the DPL election twice was ever subsequently
> elected DPL.
> [ ] Bdale Garbee is unbeatable.
> [ ] Bdale Garbee has disappointed me.
> [ X ] We should elect a DPL based on his or her platform and
> contributions to the project, not based on personality issues.
> [ ] A DPL candidate shouldn't make promises in his or her
> platform.
> [ ] We should elect a DPL who reflects who we want to be, even if
> they don't reflect who we are.
> [ ] DPL elections are essentially popularity contests.
> [ ] There is nothing we can do about the above statement; it's the
> nature of the beast.
> [ ] Circulating this questionnaire proves that you're unfit to be
> Project Leader.
> [ ] Circulating this questionnaire demonstrates leadership.
> [ X ] Circulating this questionnaire is a cynical attempt to
> manipulate the electorate.
> [ ] Debian Developers should publicly and prominently campaign for
> the person they'd prefer to see as Project Leader.
> [ ] Debian Developers should keep their DPL preferences to
> themselves.
> [ X ] DPL campaigns have increasingly come to adopt traits of
> conventional politics.
> [ X ] I find previous statement true and not a cause for concern.
> [ ] The DPL can barely wipe his nose without consensus. (The DPL
> is essentially a figurehead without much real power.)
> [ ] Debian's effort at a constitutional system of governance
> has been a failure.
> [ X ] The Debian Constitution and the apparatuses instituted by it
> are basically instruments of last resort, called into play
> when our traditional methods of operation fail.
> [ ] We'd be better off with a few hundred fewer Developers.
> [ ] We'd be better off with more Developers.
> [ ] Debian distributes too many packages; we should narrow our
> focus.
>
> Comments:
DMUP: DDs should have a clue. People with a clue know what to do / not
to do.
Electing DPL, based on: Primarily platform, contributions are of less
importance.
I have removed direct questions about Branden Robinson from this mail
--
Rune B. Broberg
Feel free to GPG-encrypt email sent to me. Keyid: 0x87CD3DBD